AR: The Reverend Nicky Gumbel and the founder, well not the founder, but the architect of the Alpha course … Would you say that was accurate?

NG: Well, some might say the pioneer of Alpha ... that's how they sometimes describe me. I didn't start it. It started in 1977. Charles Marnham was the Curate. It started in the flat just over there, and they had six people on it and it grew from there. Lots and lots of people have been involved in the evolution of Alpha over the years.

AR: I appreciate that. Ok, just to get some background, tell me about the origins of Alpha in the 70s first, but also your role in taking over its running.

NG: Well I was involved gently in the 70s because I was a member of the congregation here from 1976. It started in 1977 in a flat here. It was a six week course for people who were already Christians. And then, in 1981, it was taken on by someone called John Irvine, who was a Curate here, and he developed it into a ten week course with a weekend, and that really changed the nature of the course quite a lot, and it started to grow quite rapidly. Then John Irvine ran it from '81 to '85 and Nicky Lee took it on from '85 to 1990, and I took it on in 1990. It was already a thriving course, and I did very little to it really except to make it slightly more aimed at people outside the Church, so that was when it really began, numbers wise, to grow.

AR: So, in its first inception in the 70s, you say it was for people who were already Christians. What's the goal if people are already Christians?

NG: It was the basics of Christianity really; it was designed for people who had become Christians. It was only six weeks … I don't know what the talks were. I have seen the original syllabus, but it was probably something about the Bible and something about prayer, and something about the Church. They had a different course for people who were enquiring in those days.

AR: And when you took over in 1990…

NG: It was October 1990. I did the talks when Nicky was leaving, but I actually took over the leadership of it in 1990.

AR: And how did the agenda change when you took over?

NG: It didn't change a huge amount. What I found was we were getting a lot of people coming who were not Christians, and I realised then that it could be adapted a bit for them, because they had rather different questions from the people who were already Christians. So, we started to adapt it, but we didn't do too much to it, so we left it pretty well as it was, because it seemed to be working - that was the point. It wasn't what you would have designed as a course for people who weren't Christians. I mean, there's no way you'd have put those talks in that were in there. The kind of courses we had for people who weren't Christians were, 'Why does God allow suffering?', 'Are all religions the same?', 'Is there evidence for the resurrection?' … so, we had this course that was designed for Christians, that seemed to work for people who weren't. So it was that which surprised us.

AR: When you say work …

NG: Well, people seemed to want to come on it, people seemed to enjoy it and, actually, some people found faith on it … and then they brought their friends. So there was clearly something happening through the course.

AR: So what do you attribute the success of the course and the expansion since the 90s to? What is it that gets those people interested?

NG: The interesting thing is that we didn't sit down to write something. I sort of stumbled on it, and I found this thing that, as I say, had this appeal to people outside of the Church, and we've been trying to work out why this is ever since. It's the opposite way round to the normal thing: you have a theory, try it out and it works in practice. We've got something that works in practice, and we're trying to work out how we can make it work in theory. So, why is it? I think there are a number of things about it. I think it's a low key, relaxed, unthreatening, non-confrontational way for people to explore pretty big questions. I think a lot of people do have questions about life, 'What's the purpose of my life?', 'What's the meaning of my life?', 'Why am I here?' … It's hard to find a place where you can discuss those issues. You can't go down to the pub and say, 'What do you think the meaning of life is?' It's hard at a football match to discuss those kinds of issues. But actually, most people have those questions, somewhere in the back of their minds. And if you can find a place where you can discuss it with a group of people who, like you, are outside of the Church, and it's a non-threatening, relaxed environment, quite a lot of people want to do that.

AR: And what sort of demographic do you see? Because some critics and some supporters talk about it appealing to a very middle-class, very white, relatively affluent and relatively young group of people and, certainly on my course, that was exactly what I saw. I think I was the oldest, bar one, and I'm 34.

NG: That's very encouraging. Well, you did it in Islington, so I guess that is Islington isn't it? If you do it in Brixton prison it'll be a different group of people. If you do it in Burundi it'll be very different. Alpha's operating in 169 countries, so it's operating in every culture; in China, rural India, right across the globe.

AR: But initially it grew in London, in that demographic I've just tried to describe. Is that right?

NG: Yes, although I would say that one of the things that helped it was the fact that this is quite a cosmopolitan congregation here. We've just done our survey and, for example, at our 11.30 service, there are more non-white than white in that congregation. 36% of our congregation are non-white, 10% are Chinese … Being in the centre of London we get a lot of people, we get a lot of Americans; we get a lot of Malaysians…

AR: Has it always been like that or is that a result of Alpha's success?

NG: A little bit of that, but this part of London is very cosmopolitan. You've got Imperial College; you've got students from all over the world. So I think the crucible out of which Alpha came was quite a cosmopolitan one. We always looked out on a room that had quite a variety of people in it, and I think that's helped form something that can be transported to Asia, South America, the US, India and all these other places.

AR: So, in its inception, the term, I don't know if you actually use it, but many people talk about 'de-churched people'… people who, like me, come from a Christian cultural background, who maybe went to a Christian school, or have Christianity within their family, but are no longer churchgoers; these people may consider themselves to be Christians or, like me, atheists, but they have an understanding of who Jesus was and how Christianity basically works. So how is it that Alpha really capitalises on that demographic?

NG: I think what tends to happen is the course is representative of the area. So, for instance, most people who live in Islington are probably what you've just described as de-churched. But in China, most of the people who come on the course might be atheist. At a conference we did in Singapore, most of them described themselves as 'free-thinkers' beforehand. In different parts of the world there are different backgrounds. When we looked at the analysis of our own course here I think it was pretty representative of what the population at large is. I think 75% of the population of this country are probably still de-churched. It's the younger end, the 25%, the merging generation, who have no church background at all.

AR: So the 'un-churched'?

NG: Yes, if you turn that category de-churched in to the un-churched, I would say the make-up of Alpha here is probably like that: 75% are un-churched.

AR: What do you think the aspect of un-churched people is, if we can use that term? What is missing, or what are the questions that they don't have answers to, which Alpha attempts to address?

NG: It's very interesting because the un-churched are the new people coming in. The younger end tend to be the un-churched, the ones who've got no baggage at all. And in a sense they come at it with a great advantage, in some ways.

AR: What sort of baggage are you talking about?

NG: Well, experience of thinking of Christianity as boring, for example, because they've got no experience at all of Christianity. If you've had an experience where you've been at school or you've been involved in services and you've thought, 'That's so dull,' yes, you've got some information but also it's something that may have put you off, whereas if you haven't got that experience at all you come to it with completely fresh eyes. So there's a mixture of people, and there are advantages and disadvantages in both of those.

AR: The way you're talking about it, although the goal, officially, as you said at the beginning, is a method to explore Christianity in a relaxed and informal setting (and it certainly was all of those things where I did it), surely the goal as an evangelical is to convert agnostics to Christianity?

NG: This may sound pernickety but I wouldn't describe myself as an evangelical. These are labels, which I don't think are helpful. If I was going to use any label it would be Christian, and if you push me any further I'd say I'm an Anglican - that's the family of the Church that I belong to. There's nothing wrong with any of the other labels, but if you have any of them I want them all. If you're going to say, 'I'm Catholic, liberal, evangelical…' let's have them all. But I wouldn't want to isolate one of those. Personally I think labels are terribly unhelpful because they enable you to dismiss things. But, your main question is the purpose of the course. The purpose of the course is to give as many people as possible the opportunity to explore these things. I was an atheist and I came to experience a relationship with God which had a radically transforming effect on my life, on my relationships, on every aspect of my life, for the better. So, obviously I hope other people will experience that. But it's very important to me that they have a sense of freedom while they're doing the course and they don't feel in any way pressurised in to it. They're free to come and go as they please, they can explore it in a relaxed way. Obviously I'm disappointed that a lot of people end the course as atheists. I'd love it if that wasn't the case, in some ways. But in another sense I find it very reassuring that they do, because it means that they can enjoy the course and not feel any pressure to convert. They feel free to make up their own mind, and that is a very important part of it.

AR: Let's talk about the labels point that you were just making, which I think is very interesting. You're not the first clergyman to resist those definitions, and yet from an outsider, from my point of view as an atheist, you see labels and boundaries and definitions throughout, not just in Christianity, but in all religions.

NG: The only label I would choose for myself is Christian, but if you pushed me and you say, 'What sort of Christian are you?' I'm an Anglican.

AR: There's an important point that underlies this which relates directly to how Alpha works, and I don't know whether you're happy with this definition but I see it as a sort of 'franchise'. It's become such a global phenomenon; you said that it's been translated in to how many languages..?

NG: It's in 169 countries and it's been translated in to 100 languages.

AR: But the course has a curriculum and, as far as I can tell, the diversity of how that curriculum is interpreted is astonishing. And if I'd taken the Alpha course two miles up the road in Hackney where I live rather than in Islington which is on my way home, then I get the impression that I would have had a massively different experience. So how does the diversity amongst the different denominations affect what is actually taught?

NG: The diversity amongst the denominations is not so great because the course is the same. It's the same in the Roman Catholic Church as in the Anglican, as in the Salvation Army. That's one of the things that had to happen over the years, as it moved. 1966 was the first conference for Roman Catholic clergy. There were very minor adaptations, but there were some things that we needed to just adapt, and things we learnt, actually, through our interaction with the Catholic Church.

AR: Let me pick you up on that. I think what you've just said can't be true because if you take a Pentecostal church where there is a heavily charismatic bent, where they actively encourage the traits of charismatic Christianity, such as speaking in tongues and healing, that is massively different to what happens in a very straight Anglican church such as St. Mary's in Islington, although I do know that Graham Kings and Toby Hole there do talk in tongues when they're praying. Now, that didn't happen on our course and it wasn't actively encouraged. But if I'd gone to a Pentecostal church or if I'd come here, the atmosphere to encourage glossolalia would have been far stronger, presumably?

NG: I don't know. Probably one of the strongest movements of the Holy Spirit is in the Roman Catholic Church, so there's not a huge theological difference between the official teaching of the Catholic Church and the Anglican Church, for example.

AR: I come from a Catholic church, although I'm an atheist, and Father Leader would think that speaking tongues is the stuff of Ju Ju madmen.

NG: Well I don't know whether he thinks that, but the Catechism that is up there [on the bookshelf] does not say that, nor do many, many Catholics around the world. The Pentecostal movement is strongest in the Catholic Church, and I think there are 110 million Catholics, at least, around the world who do have some experience along those lines that you've just described.

AR: I wasn't planning to talk about speaking in tongues until a bit later, but let's do it while we're on it. How important is it to Alpha, relative to how important it is in Christianity as a whole?

NG: I would say it's about the same. It's not that important, but it's there. If you read the New Testament it's not that important, but it is there. It was part of the course that I inherited, and I basically left it there. I personally think it was in the providence of God that it was there. What I see is that some people find it very difficult. On the other hand I think that when people experience something that seems to be supernatural, in some ways it cuts through the secular mindset.

AR: What do you mean by 'seems to be supernatural'?

NG: Well I think it is a supernatural activity, and people see that.

AR: What do you think is going on when that happens to you?

NG: I think it's a form of prayer which comes from the Holy Spirit, and it's there in the Book of Acts and there in the history of the Church. I can give you a book by the preacher to the Pope, where he talks about this experience. It's something that he's experienced himself, and it's common throughout the different parts of the Church. It's not a huge emphasis in the New Testament, and I don't think it's a huge emphasis on Alpha. I hope it's not a huge emphasis on Alpha, because it shouldn't be.

AR: It is one of the aspects that critics of Alpha tend to focus on, on the grounds that it does feel very alien to people who don't participate, or can't. Certainly there is plenty of scientific evidence on what's going on. Often the distinction between what happens in patients with mental illness and what happens in patients going through glossolalia looks very similar. But you actually believe there is a supernatural mechanism at play here, rather than a manifestation of something biological?

NG: Yes, I think it's one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It's not the only gift and it's not right at the heart of the New Testament, but it is there, and I think we don't give it much more emphasis than the New Testament gives it, which is not very much. If you came to our weekend and heard it I don't think you would feel this is something that is weird.

AR: Well I've watched loads of videos of it happening and I do think it's very weird.

NG: Most people who make a video make something to look weird. If you came along on one of the weekends that we have and you saw it … Most people's reaction to it is, 'That was very beautiful'. Often they have quite a lot of concerns beforehand, because they've heard all sorts of things, then they hear it and think it was very beautiful and very peaceful. It may or may not be for them, and it doesn't really matter whether it is or not. I have no idea how many people who help or lead on Alpha have that gift or not and it really doesn't worry me whether they do or don't.

AR: So there were a couple of questions about speaking in tongues from people commenting on the first piece that I wrote. So, one was, 'When you're speaking in tongues, why is it that nonsense syllables are all formed with perfect English pronunciation?'

NG: I don't think that is the case actually.

AR: It is, in fact, and looking at the scientific research, no matter which country you're from you see the same vocal patterns as your natural language.

NG: Hang on a second, is that really the case?

AR: That's the research I've come across.Rebecca Stewart [HTB staff, sitting in on the interview]: My husband Alex was praying for someone very quietly in tongues, and he didn't know what he was saying - it was the spiritual language. But the person he was praying for said to him, 'Do you know what you were saying?' and Alex said he didn't, and he said, 'Well you were praying in Arabic, and you were saying "More peace".'

AR: He was actually saying Arabic words?RS: Yes.

AR: So that's a different phenomenon from glossolalia, that's xenolalia, which is also recognised as a phenomenon, but is equally not understood. This question from one of the [CiF] readers was more an insinuation that one can only adopt what is considered to be speaking in tongues based on one's own language, and therefore there isn't something totally supernatural; it is derived from the speech centres in your brain.

NG: Well I would say that's supernatural. There have been several cases of different languages recognised by someone else. That's been our experience.

AR: Another one from the [talk]boards: Does anyone get any special insight in to anything when they're talking in tongues?

NG: It's a form of prayer, that's how I see it. In the New Testament it has the same word, there's not a different word used, because they all understood what was being said and that was the gift. The Greek word is 'languages', 'other languages', that's the literal translation of the Greek word that's used both in Acts, where it was the Day of Pentecost, and in One Corinthians, where it's a gift of the spirit. There does appear to be a slight difference in accent in Corinthians and I think that's what you're referring to - Acts where it was clearly understood by the heroes and in Corinthians where interpretation is required. But what Paul is saying in One Corinthians is that it's a form of prayer and it's a gift from God which helps you … I'm trying to explain something to you and I'm struggling to find the words to explain it … In your relationship with God there are also times when you want to say things and you're trying to find the words to express them. In a human relationship sometimes you struggle for words and you've got to do it, but in a relationship with God he can actually give you a language which enables you to communicate. What's happening is, it's all going on in the brain, I know, but I'm trying to express things in a language which is limited by the words that I know. In a relationship with God you feel things and you want to express them and you're not limited by human language. You can express what you really feel in your heart, through a language that he gives you, and that helps you to communicate with God. It doesn't really matter so much what the words are I don't think - maybe if you're a real expert in prayer you could do it through silence. But I think sometimes it helps to express it and to know you're expressing it to God. Paul talked about praying with your spirit and that's basically what it is, it's expressing what you feel deep down in a language which God gives you.

AR: There was a follow on from that which is interesting based on what you just said. This is from someone on the boards as well. How can there be a technique for something that is apparently so spontaneous?

NG: I don't think there is a technique. I think that the gifts of the spirit are always subject to the control of the person who's exercising them. You're not forced in to doing it. Love never forces. And therefore 'the spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet' is another way it is put. You don't suddenly find yourself taken over by a spirit and find yourself speaking tongues. You're in control, but it's a gift. You can stop and start as you please, but it's a way of communicating with God.

AR: I've seen videos online, and I again take your point about how videos are edited, but I've seen videos in which there looks to me like - and this is very different to what you're describing now, which is a very personal and acquired thing - but it looks very much to me like mass hysteria, where people are being very vocally hounded in to having experiences which, in opposition to what you just said, they're not in control at all. I've got no idea whether they're faking, whether they're just appeasing the crowd or whatever, but that is not what you've just described.

NG: No, I've never seen that. It certainly doesn't happen on our Alpha course like that. It's a very peaceful, it's a very beautiful thing, and for me it's a personal prayer language that I use in my relationship with God and I think for most people it is. It's something that helps them. It's not something I do all the time. There have been moments in my life where it's been a very helpful gift to me. The moment I heard the news that my mother had had a heart attack, which she died from, I was in the taxi on the way to the hospital and I really wanted to pray and I prayed in tongues. I found that a huge relief because I knew I was praying but I didn't have to go through trying to work out how I should be praying or what I should be praying, I just prayed. I was just praying quietly in tongues and I found that a really helpful way to pray. There are other times when I use the gift when I really feel I don't know what to pray or how to pray. I know what I feel but I just can't quite put it in to words, and I use that, I find it a helpful gift. I don't think you need to speak in tongues, I don't think all Christians do speak in tongues, nobody has to speak in tongues, nobody's forced to, but if somebody wants to I think it's a good gift.

AR: Ok, let's move on from that. How do you think Alpha is perceived by the General Synod and the rest of organised Christianity?

NG: I know it has a lot of support from our bishops. Our own bishop, the bishop of London, has just hosted our International Week. We had 74 archbishops and bishops from around the world and he opened the conference and he's been one of the initiators. About ten years ago he wrote to all the other bishops in England and said 'Do you realise what's happening here? You ought to investigate for yourself.' I think most bishops now, because they go around doing confirmations, and they see how many people come to be confirmed because they've been on an Alpha course, are behind it. I don't think it's been criticised. All the bishops that I've ever spoken to about it have been enormously supportive of what's happening here.

AR: This week a bishop declared in the Telegraph on Sunday that Christian Britain is dead and multiculturalism and declining church numbers could cause Christianity in Britain to die.

NG: [referring to 'God is Back' by John Micklethwaite on his bookshelf] That was written by an atheist and a lapsed Catholic. Look around the world - it's not true. Globally it's certainly not true, and even in Europe they're saying it's not true.

AR: So, let me finish that question, which is that a cynic might suggest that the General Synod appreciation for Alpha is simply a response to the fact that it's one bit of Christian faith that is bucking the trend in the UK and possibly worldwide, but let's just talk about the UK. If this bishop is correct in saying that Christian Britain will be dead in the next ten years, the only way it's going to survive is through the one phenomenon which is growing, which is what you're responsible for.

NG: Well I don't agree with the premise. I think God is back, I think there is a huge amount of spiritual interest in the country. And I think the bishops are supportive of it because they see people's lives being changed. They see the difference. That's why I love doing it, because I see people who've been in prison, whose lives have been messed up, who've been alcoholics, who've been drug addicts, set free and contributing to society.

AR: Do you think it appeals to people who are vulnerable?

NG: I hope it appeals to everyone. In one sense we're all vulnerable, we're all weak human beings. But I think it appeals to a very wide range. If you look at the people who come on the course here some of them are immensely successful, they've got strong marriages, strong families, very successful careers, but they would still say that there's something missing – "I've got all this, yet I don't have an answer to the big questions of life. Why am I here? What's it all about? Yes, I'm successful, I'm intelligent, educated, I've got lots of friends", but there's something deep down, which I would describe as a spiritual hunger. They know something's missing; they know they were created for something more than this. It's true that in the prisons there is perhaps even a greater openness than elsewhere. In a way in prison you're stripped of all the things that could be barriers. You don't have all the money and the success and things that make you think, 'Well maybe that's what life is all about.' and you start to look at the really big questions. But what I see is people's lives being changed. In our congregation we have 20 people who are ex-offenders and many of them are making a major contribution to the life of the church and to society. They're people who, instead of going out committing crime they're helping in a homeless shelter, or they're serving in some other way, and that to me is a wonderful thing. Their marriages are being restored, they treat their children differently, their children say, 'It's so wonderful to come home and not have my parents fighting or my father drunk – he's sober, he cares about me, he loves me, he gives me attention.'

AR: Do you think that submission to Christ is the essential step in that process? Isn't what you're describing simply trying to be a better person? This may sound kinda ridiculous but vicars love to rely on the petty crook who has 'found God and gone good'.

NG: Well they're not just petty crooks. Two guys in our congregation were responsible for the largest importation ever of cannabis in to this country ever. They got twelve and a half years. They were associates of the Kray Brothers, they knew all the Great Train Robbers! Michael Emmett was there last night sitting in the front row of the Church. He is a fantastic guy. The contribution he's made to the Church in every area of the Church's life has been fantastic.

AR: But conversion to Christianity or any religion within a prison setting is not limited to Alpha. It predates Alpha by a long way…

NG: Of course, yes. I'm not really committed to Alpha at all. I'm a Christian. I'm committed to Jesus Christ and I want people to know about Christ, because it's the most wonderful thing. People can say, 'I'll try and give up drugs,' or 'I'll try and live a better life,' but actually, if you're trapped in that lifestyle, you need, I think, some supernatural power to get you out of it. It's not easy to get out of the kind of lifestyles those people are in where all your family are criminals and all your friends are criminals – that is not an easy break to make, and it is a hard thing for a lot of these people.

AR: Why do you think there's so much hostility towards religion and, specifically, Christianity, in Britain these days?

NG: I don't know, but I don't know if it's any different. If you read the New Testament there was quite a lot of hostility then. They were locked up, they were stoned. I don't know that it's any more unpopular than it's been in the history of the Church. I think it's just one of those things.

AR: I can't help noticing that the way you've sat yourself (we're in your study), if I just look six inches over your left shoulder I can see The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins sitting quite prominently on your shelf. Do you see any effect of his work and this growing movement of free-thinkers or atheism?

NG: I think his writing has had an effect on a group of people. I would say I've noticed in the last two or three years that amongst the people coming on Alpha there are some people who have been very influenced by his writings, and who speak the same kind of language, almost the same tone. You almost feel like he's in the group. It's a small minority but two or three times in the last couple of years there's been someone…

AR: What sort of tone is it that you're experiencing?

NG: I think it's a slightly more hostile approach. We encourage people to be hostile on Alpha. I'm always glad to hear somebody speak like that because that's what we want. All that I'm saying in terms of its influence is that I can see that it has had an influence on people.

(NG hands AR a copy of his book, Is God a Delusion?)

AR: You are an incredibly prolific writer.

NG: No, no, no, only because it relates to the question. I did find a couple of people who were reading it and thinking, 'God has been disproved'. I was just having a go at saying, 'I'm not sure that is the case.'

AR: Well I don't think Dawkins does say that, but I don't want to talk about Dawkins...

NG: No no, but that's my attempt to answer some of the points he makes.

AR: One of the things I've seen on the course, and from someone I've spoken to who says that this contributes to Alpha's success, is that it engages lay people from the Church, and certainly the two guys who help out in St Mary's take a very proactive role. I detect a slightly different message. This is not a personal criticism of the person running the course, the Curate, who obviously has an academic background as a biblical scholar and a theologian, and the two helpers who don't. Now I hear, not a different message, but a very different nuance to the way they're saying things. The Curate says, and I know he's holding back, and he's got an annoying mosquito such as myself pushing him with pretty superficial arguments that you probably come across a million times, I know he's holding back, otherwise it would just be the two of us talking and it would prevent an open discussion. The two lay guys in the church give far less nuance, far less subtlety and what I describe as the clichés of Christianity. Lots of language which I think is largely meaningless to people who are being very critical, and much more dogmatic. When I was asking questions like, 'If I live a life in the footsteps of Christ but don't believe that the resurrection was a real phenomenon, can I get in on judgement day?' Toby [the Curate] says, 'I don't know.' I love that. You never come across religious people who say 'I don't know.' The other two guys, Mike and Bob, say 'No'. Now that's a really interesting phenomenon because you've got people with an academic theological background and you've got people who are straight up Christians, grassroots Christians, and I detect a dichotomy between those two groups which I think is reflected in Christianity across Britain.

NG: Well I would say that's quite a small sample! I hope you wouldn't find too dogmatic lay people involved in Alpha generally. I hope most lay people would be willing to say 'I don't know' to those kinds of questions. And I don't know that most lay people are more dogmatic than clergymen, I think some clergy can be very dogmatic.

AR: But I do perceive that distinction between what Rowan Williams says and what Christians across the country think, and this is reflected in questions about how science relates to religion quite often.

NG: Well, Rowan is very nuanced, he is brilliant, and I am personally a great fan of Rowan Williams. Jane, his wife, is on our staff here. They both teach at the theological college. I think he's absolutely brilliant. He is very nuanced, but not everyone can be in the Rowan Williams league - he's probably one of the greatest brains in the country. The lay people don't necessarily have the training that the clergy have had – they've had to go through theological college. But I don't think in terms of being dogmatic – I think that's a slightly different thing, I think that's more of a personality thing probably, whether some person is dogmatic. Some clergy are dogmatic, some lay people are dogmatic, some are not. But part of the training on Alpha is to 'listen to people'. I'm glad to hear that the Curate held back, because that is, again, part of the training, because it's polite, apart from anything, to listen to people.and to hear what they have to say. We get the opportunity to give the talk, the idea for small group is that they get the opportunity to have their say. Apart from anything else it's just good manners.

AR: Your name is totally synonymous with Alpha. I was sent an enormous box of your books [in prep for this interview]

NG: I try not to just pile out books. I originally wrote 'Questions of Life' because people were saying I wanna run an Alpha Course. That ['Is God a Delusion?'] I wrote cos people were saying what is the answer to Richard Dawkins, has he disproved the existence of God, so I wrote that for our congregation, to help them think through the issues.

AR: HTB has huge congregations, doesn't it?

NG: A few people come on Sunday, I dunno, 3500 come on Sunday.

AR: That's big. But I've heard that they travel, and they're coming to see you.

NG: I don't think they're coming to see me.

AR: My Aunt Ruth from Liverpool has been to see you. She thinks you're ace.

NG: That's lovely. Send her my love.

AR: My Uncle, he thinks your grin too much. You're obviously very charming and affable, and confident, and I get a tiny sense that there is a bit of cult of personality about Alpha, that you are so much at the centre, whether you like it or not, or whether you've engineered it or not, for many people you ARE Alpha.

NG: It's interesting that the perception. Because if you come here on a Sunday, that's not what you'd feel. I don't preach that often, Funnily enough I was preaching yesterday on the cults, how to spot a false prophet. We're very much a team, there's a big team here, and it makes no difference at all who's preach to how many turn up on a Sunday.

AR: Everyone I spoke to in reference to this interview their reaction was "Oh really??" it's such a phenomenon that people involved see you as a central figure. So what happens next? You've said that you're committed to Christ but not to Alpha. If the unchurched rise, the next generation who don't know who Jesus was, don't have a Christian cultural background, who may have learnt comparative religion rather than just Christianity. Will Alpha survive?

NG: In France, the DVDs are done by a guy called Marc De la Ritz who is a French Catholic. So if you do Alpha in France he's the person you relate to, he's the person on the DVDs. And I hope as it goes on that will happen more and more. Succession is taking place already

AR: But do you think that people will be attracted to a course to learn about Jesus, if they don't know who Jesus was.

NG: But in some ways I think that can be an advantage, like fresh snow. You don't have all the cultural baggage, it was terrible it was dull. Bu the questions are still there "What is the meaning of my life, what is the purpose of my life"

AR: It kinda makes it more competitive for other religions, cos you're now in an open field because Islam, or Buddhism or whatever are all competing for the same fresh blood.

NG: But that's true globally. It's been less true in the UK up till now, but many countries you go that is tha case, for example in India where Christianity is very much the minority. But still people are asking those questions and Alpha is growing fast in India and elsewhere round the world

AR: Cinema ads, TV ads, the DVDs, the books, This is a huge global brand and enterprise. How is it funded?

NG: About 10% comes from the sale of books and materials, and the rest is funded by donations. The more Alpha grows, the more money we need to raise. It's a charity.

AR: So we're talking large individual donations, or collecting pennies from the congregation

NG: It's a mixture. The congregation is very generous here. In the early years the congregation funded the whole thing. We want it to be free for everyone. No one should be charged for hearing the gospel, that's a biblical principle. Last year 1.6 million people did it around the world.

AR: Let me pick you up on that. It says on the home page that 2 million people in the UK and 13 million worldwide. Everyone I've spoken to who's done an Alpha says that there people on the course who have done it before. So how many people have really done it?

NG: I don't know, is the answer. I think the global figure is possibly an underestimate, and the UK figure may include some double counting

AR: That a tiny bit of a PR fudge there?

NG: I don't know what the figure is in the UK. Our figures are done by an independent organisation called Christian research. Their UK figure would be a bit higher than that, but we've stuck with 2 million. I'm very confident about the global figure of 13 million, because we don't know how many courses there are, because they're not registered with us. They're not registered in China for example.

AR: There's a lot of animosity of Alpha from people who haven't done it. There's accusations of cultish-ness and brainwashing. That's certainly not what I've seen, but it's exacerbated by the speaking in tongues and the charismatic slant. But one thing that keeps coming up from people I've spoken to is latent or overt homophobia. What's your stance on that?

NG: I think it's nonsense. I really do. We welcome everybody regardless of age sex race or sexual orientation. Everyone is welcome to come on Alpha.

AR: I pulled a quote out from you from an earlier interview in which you referred to the Bilbe referring to homosexuality as something that could be healed. Is that your stance?

NG: You've taken it very out of context of the whole thing. Our stance is this: We have the same attitude towards people. As the old cliché goes I've got lots of [gay] friends. It's absurd to suggest that there's any hostility…

AR: Address the issue of whether the interpretation of the Bible that says that homosexuality is something that can be healed. Is that your stance?

NG: We believe that sex is for marriage, and that's regardless of whether it's homosexual or hetero sexual.

AR: But what you've just done is, because we have legal gay unions, but marriage is still the preserve of hetero couples, if sex outside of marriage is a sin, and homosexuals can't get married, then homosexual sex is a sin.

NG: Our position on this subject is exactly the same as the Anglican Church. Our position on the issue of homosexuality is no different from the position of the Anglican Church and all the major denominations around the world. I know that it's different from the secular culture in the western world, but it's no different from the teaching of the church globally. We're Christians basically.

AR: You say that with a liberal hat on, in a congregation which is incredibly diverse in the centre of London. But because Alpha is run as a franchise you prescribe a curriculum, which has charismatic and evangelical elements to it, and is fully open to interpretation by the leader of the course wherever it' being run, to embrace the less acceptable forms of prejudice such as deep rooted homophobia. Now, I've come across people who have expressed that within Alpha very specifically, they said they were not welcome at Alpha when they revealed that they were gay. I've come across some who've said it in much subtler ways, the reference to healing.

NG: Where have you come across people not being welcome at Alpha ?

AR: By talking to people who've done it.

NG: And said they weren't welcome?

AR: Yep

NG: Which church was this?

AR: I can't say that.

NG: Why not?

AR: Because that would be revealing who they are.

NG: I'm absolutely astonished that anyone would go to a church and not be welcomed because of their sexual orientation.

AR: You'd be astonished by that, genuinely?

NG: Astonished by any church running Alpha not welcoming people because of their sexual orientation.

AR: Really? We could go to a dozen churches with relative ease which were effectively homophobic.

NG: Well I'd be amazed. We welcome people of all orientation. That seems to me to be a fundamental Christian principle. We welcome the guys I told about, the drug importers, that's what the church is for.

AR: I'm just going to push you one more time on this: Can homosexuality be healed?

NG: I think everybody needs healing. My understanding of human beings is that we were created in the image of God but we are all fallen, and Jesus died for us so that we can be redeemed. Every Christian is in a process of healing in some way. We're not as we're meant to be. God's original creation was good, and in some ways fallen away from that. And in every area of our life we need to be healed and restored and to become more Christ-like.

AR: What you've just said, inadvertently or deliberately I don't know, is that if you're taking about a crook, some of the guys who've converted via Alpha in your church as you've mentioned or someone who has a drug problem which is an obvious and incontrovertible bad thing, in me asking if homosexuality can be healed, you've made a comparison between things which are unequivocally bad, and something that I and many people believe is both normal and natural. Clarify that.

NG: Well, our position on homosexuality is exactly the same as the rest of the church.

AR: I'm not asking the rest of the church, I'm asking you.

NG: All I'm saying is that ours is the same as that. If you want to say something about this issue, you have to say it about the whole of the Christian church's attitude towards homosexuality. You cannot isolate and say, this is Alpha's attitude.

AR: But I'm asking you: Nicky Gumbel?

NG: I'm saying my attitude is the same as the Church's. But don't make out that Alpha's is different form the church cos it isn't. Our views are exactly the same as the views that I am, in a sense, under authority to have. These are the views of the Anglican Church. And it's also true of the Catholic Church, the Methodist, the Baptists, every denomination. You won't find a single historic denomination that doesn't share this same view. I think it's unfair to say that Alpha has a different view, because we don't.

AR: But you're revealing quite a dichotomy about how the franchise works. Because fine that's your position and I can't get you to say more than that, clearly. But the franchise is such that it can be operated by many different denominations, and because of the nature of having a course leader and you only exercise a curriculum level control of what's being taught. You've created a highly popular highly successful evangelical movement which is open to interpretation by people whose views are not what you've just describe, the same as the church. So the result of that is that I've come across people who've gone to Alpha and been told that they weren't welcome.

NG: Well I'm very sorry about that. Please pass on my apologies.

AR: But much more insidiously people who have been told that it's fine to be gay, but we can cure you. The implication being that being gay is a disease or something that can be cured.

NG: Well we can't control the way an Alpha course is run, that is true. Nor would we want to. The only way you can do it is to go around policing it, and that's such a heavy handed thing to do. It's a gift. We basically say this is something that has blessed our church, if your church wants to run it, here it is. You may be different from us, you're a RC church, not everything that you teach will be things that we as Anglicans agree with, but we're not going to come around a police you. So there has to be a freedom, but there's this element that the course is basically the same. If they choose to join the Catholic Church at the end of the course, that's wonderful. We have to give people the freedom to do that. The alternative would be far worse, a manipulation and control of the churches that were doing it. I don't think that's right. I think we have to say it's up to you. Of course there are going to be courses run badly, and some run very well.

AR: I think the perception of Alpha is skewed by those 'rotten apples', and I see that in the comments. There is a lot of animosity. Most people's reflection on my saying I'm doing the course was a million miles from what I experienced.

NG: I think most people's criticism comes from people who haven't done the course. Of course there are some critics who have, but most of the way off criticism is from people who have never done it. And my response is 'go and try it, it's open to everyone to come and see'.